Merged Bigfoot follies

[Northern Lights]

Unless he had a ladder.

He would have had to carry it in about a mile. Granted, it wasn't a difficult hike, but why would someone carry in a ladder and tools to do it. Doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Drewbot]

NL, don't you think it is silly to say that a 9' tall creature in Minnesota, pestering pioneer families, and Native American families wouldn't have been hunted to the point of extinction, leaving many examples of it's existence in town halls, cabins and museums?

I mean look at this comparison, if a creature of that size, in 1896 came anywhere near my kids, it would be lights out for him, I would get the town together with pitchforks, torches and our 30-30 rifles, and we would hunt him down till he was not a threat (legitimate or otherwise).

The thought is silly to the vast majority of Americans, it's just plain silly.

 

[William Parcher]

...why would someone carry in a ladder and tools to do it. Doesn't make sense to me.

That would be a way to do a Bigfoot hoax. Knock it down right on the trail there so that Bigfoot believers will see it. Makes a huge amount of sense to me.

 

[CORed]

...
No wind storms during that time either.[/QUOTE]

Unless you had a recording anemometer at the site during the time in question, you don't actually know that. In fact, I would say that two freshly broken trees in the area is a pretty good indication that there was a windstorm (or at least a strong gust) in that area.

 

[Northern Lights]

...
No wind storms during that time either.

Unless you had a recording anemometer at the site during the time in question, you don't actually know that. In fact, I would say that two freshly broken trees in the area is a pretty good indication that there was a windstorm (or at least a strong gust) in that area.[/QUOTE]

These two tree breaks were 29 miles apart and the first one was 2013 and the second was 2011, so they are not related.

 

[William Parcher]

you don't actually know that.

He said he only says true things here.

 

[Castro]

He would have had to carry it in about a mile. Granted, it wasn't a difficult hike, but why would someone carry in a ladder and tools to do it. Doesn't make sense to me.

Actually two guys (and a swiss knife;-) can easily do the job without any ladder:

(Credit to William Parcher)

 

[tsig]

Why would I believe that? You already said that you saw a 9 foot Bigfoot which is an untruth.


Show me the monkey!

We never get the monkey, just the business.

 

[Northern Lights]

That would be a way to do a Bigfoot hoax. Knock it down right on the trail there so that Bigfoot believers will see it. Makes a huge amount of sense to me.

C'mon, really? I completely disagree. If a hoaxer is going to go to all the trouble to setting something up, they are going to do something a lot more elaborate than a tree break out in the middle of the forest where it's highly unlikely that someone will actually find it.

Hoaxers want their stuff found. They don't hide it.

 

[Resume]

C'mon, really? I completely disagree. If a hoaxer is going to go to all the trouble to setting something up, they are going to do something a lot more elaborate than a tree break out in the middle of the forest where it's highly unlikely that someone will actually find it.

Hoaxers want their stuff found. They don't hide it.

What the hell would footie be doing breaking trees? Why would it spend calories doing that? Why would anyone attribute this behaviour to ole foo in the first place?

 

[The Shrike]

NL, don't you think it is silly to say that a 9' tall creature in Minnesota, pestering pioneer families, and Native American families wouldn't have been hunted to the point of extinction, leaving many examples of it's existence in town halls, cabins and museums? . . .

nommed.

 

[William Parcher]

Hoaxers want their stuff found. They don't hide it.

But you found it didn't you?

You sound like Yogi Berra. Found something that nobody can find. Lol

 

[William Parcher]

You mean like this?

5 days earlier, this trail was walked and that was not there. No wind storms during that time either.

So you were on this clear path twice in 5 days? That makes this an excellent place to do a Bigfoot hoax. You said so yourself that hoaxers want their hoaxes to be found.

 

[William Parcher]

Trust me, we looked, but didn't find any. Here is another example of a break. The top was several feet from the base and perfectly in the trail.

Again, no hairs found.

Again a broken tree found on a cleared trail. That makes this an excellent place to do a Bigfoot hoax. You said so yourself that hoaxers want their hoaxes to be found.

If the two broken trees you have shown are hoaxes then they disprove your own theory because you did find both of them and the hoaxer would have been completely successful.

 

[Resume]

You mean like this?

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=1149&pictureid=8892[/qimg]
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=1149&pictureid=8891[/qimg]

5 days earlier, this trail was walked and that was not there. No wind storms during that time either.

Looking again at the second photo here you can see the tree is clearly blocking the two track. This means stop here. Stop driving to the lake, river, etc.; no logging, hunting, parking with your significant other . . . No access beyond this point.

It's pretty common on private and public lands and no mystery.

 

[Pterodactyl]

As a relatively new observer of the train wreck that is Bigfootery, watching this latest attribution to BF behavior (the snapping of full grown trees mid trunk) metastasize throughout various groups of researchers based solely on hearsay from a single source has been quite educational.

Is this how it normally goes?

 

[Drewbot]

I asked the Physics experts on the JREF forum for their input on the matter.

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=1149&pictureid=8891[/qimg]

5 days earlier, this trail was walked and that was not there. No wind storms during that time either.

That is a dead tree. None of the branches have green needles on them and if it was a live tree just broken off then there would be sap around the break. I still have trees out back blown over from last fall that still have fairly green needles on the branches. The second tree photo late in the thread is an example of a really small one that still has green needles.

Check out the tree on the right with wounds on it. I showed pictures in another thread regarding those, and how it weakens trees. Trees are not uniform. The weak ones with injuries, insects, tree rot, etc. get broken.

This is tantamount to wandering around a city and playing the personal incredulity game because some windows are open and others are shut. Being "open" to all explanations, but favoring space aliens using them as entry points to steal food.

 

[LTC8K6]

Why does bigfoot think that a dead tree across a trail will bother a human?

Is bigfoot unaware that trees commonly fall in the forest?

Is bigfoot also unaware of chain saws and their ability to rapidly remove trees?

 

[captain koolaid]

Machete could perhaps do that; need to see the other end. This one doesn't appear at all natural. Man-made most likely. Footie-made not at all likely.

Bigfoot with a machete could do that.